Cadence ARCA : opinions please

[Radni14]

Symphony Sound - Tube Friendly Speakers a forum contribution i am repeating here.

hifiashok,
Thanks for posting the link for benifit of new members like me. I have followed may be 50 - 60 % of what it says. But I also have two measurement charts- graphs for ARCA which I like to post here for your study . . One graph is impedence ohm vs. freq. Hz , but it does not have the phase difference curve plotted on it . Does these charts give you any idea as to tube friendly or not ?

 

[jls001]

Some members had posted about Emerald Physics speakers. Here's a link to seller on audiogon (new piece with huge discount) with a huge writeup of the CS 2.3 model:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrfull&1313201955

Looks very, very interesting at its price point. Is there a dealer in India?
Joshua

 

[hifiashok]

hifiashok,
Thanks for posting the link for benifit of new members like me. I have followed may be 50 - 60 % of what it says. But I also have two measurement charts- graphs for ARCA which I like to post here for your study . . One graph is impedence ohm vs. freq. Hz , but it does not have the phase difference curve plotted on it . Does these charts give you any idea as to tube friendly or not ?

since the designer of the Cadence LS range conceptualised them with tube amps in mind (IMHO), and Cadence has two shining examples of these (designed by the same genius, again IMHO), i guess the answer lies there, since the pics u have attached are not legible.

 

[hifiashok]

Some members had posted about Emerald Physics speakers. Here's a link to seller on audiogon (new piece with huge discount) with a huge writeup of the CS 2.3 model:

Emerald Physics CS-2.3 For Sale | AudiogoN

Looks very, very interesting at its price point. Is there a dealer in India?
Joshua

ARN Systems, B'lore.

 

[Radni14]

hifiashok,
I wrote to Cadence ,for giving to me measurement curves ( charts ) of ARCA speakers for comparing with other spkrs , and for knowing how does the impadence curve falls over entire frequency bandwidth . To my surprise , Cadence writes to me with regret that they cannot part with such information , and that this is a management decision.
I thought measurements curves of spkrs from audio industry piers are published in leading mags and no one seems to care.

 

[Bluu]

Maybe they have something to hide?

 

[hifiashok]

take it or leave it, like it or lump it, we are like this wonley!

 

[Radni14]

Bluu,
I sure think it is not very polite from a Mfg company to refuse to give to a potential customer ( or any audio enthusiast , for that matter ) such technical info. Mags like Stereophile and TAS publish such charts for all the spkrs all the time. In fact , John Atkinson at Stereophile is doing such measurements all the time and publishing them . Reputed cos are eager to send review samples to them for such purpose/ favour .
I do knot know how Cadence is helping their marketing ( and making a potential customer jittery ) by refusing to give tech info. I thought giving such info was a part of marketing exercise .
But , like they say " it is a management decision " . I have to accept !

 

[Bluu]

I agree, they shouldn't withhold that information from you unless they have something to hide.

Thank God Cadence is not the only brand you are looking at.

 

[anm]

or worse, they don't have them themselves!

 

[jls001]

May I point you (again) to the Emerald Physics CS2.3, or better still the CS1.3?
Joshua

 

[Radni14]

jsl001,
Thanks for your suggestion.

I checked out Emerald Physics C 2.3 and C 2.7 ( but not C 1.3 ) , but these are " backless beauties " like Jamo 909 . Somehow , I have reservations ( purely personal comfort thing ) against designs without "Enclosures " . So I do not wish to go for such enclosure- less designs when within my budget , there are other conventional options.
Personally , I believe reproduction of sound thorough spkrs is primarily a subject of physics and physical dimentions and design of enclosure plays very vital role for accurate reproductions for which there may not be a short-cut , unless there is a compromise. I am not surprised , therefor , that I could never appreciate the sound from small jewel like speakers form BOSE, eventhough they may be excellent aesthetic fit for most room decors.

 

[prem]

Hi Radni 14

Why dont you look at Rethm Trishna. They are very good speakers and have been favourably reviewed in Stereophile

 

[odyssey]

Hi
An enclosure in a speaker is a necessity since most designers have chosen to follow the conventional path. The designer of EP has chosen to a follow a different philosophy and do away with the need for an enclosure by compensating for it externally in a DSP crossover. In essence he does the every same thing that conventional speakers (boxed designs) do, the end goal is still as linear a response as possible. However, the flip side is that the result is better with the open box - actually make that far far better when looking only at the frequency response within a room (untreated or minimally treated). The Jamo 909 while being an open baffle comes nowhere close since there is no external compensation for room equalization. The bass from an open baffle speaker in terms of quality, speed, articulation, is unparalleled.
If you are looking at traditional designs - have a look at the Usher Diamond series - the Be-10 or Be-20 or even their entry level dancer series speakers, perhaps they may interest you more.

cheers

jsl001,
Thanks for your suggestion.

I checked out Emerald Physics C 2.3 and C 2.7 ( but not C 1.3 ) , but these are " backless beauties " like Jamo 909 . Somehow , I have reservations ( purely personal comfort thing ) against designs without "Enclosures " . So I do not wish to go for such enclosure- less designs when within my budget , there are other conventional options.
Personally , I believe reproduction of sound thorough spkrs is primarily a subject of physics and physical dimentions and design of enclosure plays very vital role for accurate reproductions for which there may not be a short-cut , unless there is a compromise. I am not surprised , therefor , that I could never appreciate the sound from small jewel like speakers form BOSE, eventhough they may be excellent aesthetic fit for most room decors.

 

[Radni14]

odyssey
Thanks ,
I will consider Usher .

 

[hifiashok]

Quad Hifi - Classic Series - Classic ESL Series - ESL-989

 

[malvai]

@Radni: why don't you look at the new Maggie 1.7?

Its a freakin briulliant speaker for a very small price... despite the idiotoc indian pricing, you can get 'em for about 1.6L.

 

[Radni14]

Quad Hifi - Classic Series - Classic ESL Series - ESL-989

hifiashok,
Any dealer for Quad in India for Quad products ?

 

[hifiashok]

if my info isn't too old

Designer Audio India Pvt. Ltd.
Mr. Ravi Shah/Mr. Kshitij Shah,
Website: Designer Audio - Sole Distributor for India of world-renowned brands such as Wharfedale, Quad, Phil Jones, DAC, Byford Audio, Vanguard, Vueguard, Vuemax in Mumbai, India.
Phone: +91 (22) 23520320, 23524443
eMail: [email protected]

 

[jls001]

I had heard of Emerald Physics in passing from past posts on this forum but never gave it much thought until someone suggested it on this very thread. I read up and my interest was piqued by its use of signal processing to correct room issues. On top of that, it uses a less prevalent "backless" open baffle configuration, and still claims to go right down to 20Hz (I have always wanted a full ranger - not much a sub guy). Its driver configuration is also very interesting.

The CS 2.3, therefore, is definitely on my future listening list (but not the CS3 as it's not a full ranger).

Now to figure out how to go to Bangalore on "official business" and meet up with Sridhar and to save up for it! Of course I'm not in a hurry. I have even started dreaming of the second power amp that will be needed to bi-amp it!

.....sweet dreams are made of these...

And it already has a clear upgrade path (by way of Spatial Computer).

But I digress from the original post. I say do go listen to the Arca, irrespective of what the graphs may read (I'm of the opinion that a nice flat response on paper does not necessarily translate into musicality - aberrations may be what makes a musical device sound interesting and "musical"). You just may find that it's a dream come true (sonically, that is). If it isn't, no harm done as there are obviously many other choices in your budget. Another option could be the Maggie 3.7 although that's two-and-half times the cost of the 1.7 (US list price is 5.5K USD) suggested by Manav. Even higher up the budget chain is the Quad ESL 2805 for a cool 10K USD. Happy hunting.
Joshua